![]() | Nate Hagens : Natural Gas Cliff and Credit Situation on Global Public Media | The Oil Drum | DrumBeat: December 30, 2008 | ![]() |
27 comments on My Top 10 Energy Stories of 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
27 comments on My Top 10 Energy Stories of 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so.”
—Mark Twain
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
Regarding oil available for use, we really have three issues:
1. The trend in the amount of oil coming out of the ground. With low prices, this will soon approach the natural decline rate (perhaps 7% for oil, much more for natural gas) because it will not make economic sense to drill more wells. If prices increase, there may be some mitigation, but we are still likely on the downside of the slope. A best-case example of what might happen is the US decline rate. In the US, with infill drilling, new discoveries, and EOR, the decline rate is still around 2% per year.
2. The increase in energy efficiency. In the US, the figures I have seen have been about 2% per year. It is difficult to see how this can be increased dramatically, especially with the current lack of capital for investment.
3. The decrease in net supply, due to declining EROEI. Years ago, this was negligible, but with oil being found in more and more difficult locations, more oil is required simply to get the oil out of the ground.
Given this combination of factors, energy from oil is likely flat to decreasing, even considering the growth in energy efficiency.
On the other side of the equation is the amount of growth required to continue to fund debt. It seems to me that in order to pay back loans with interest, the economy needs enough growth to fund the "real" interest rate. Normally, I would expect this to be on the order of 2% to 3% a year.
Comparing needed economic growth to what we are likely to generate with available oil and gas, it seems like we are facing a continuing problem.
And the generation of that capital - whether money or resources - itself depends on energy.
cfm - loving it when a plan comes together - in Gray, ME
How many wedges would it take to hit 7% decrease in demand per year?
35 MPG average for the new-model fleet: maybe 2.2%/year.
Increase to 20% ride-sharing over 10 years: 2%/year.
Organizing and trip-optimizing shopping and other errands: ??
Building or repurposing stores/offices in residential areas, and vice versa: ??
Even at a mere 10 million vehicles/year, the USA replaces about 5% of its fleet every year. If a substantial fraction of the replacements were electric, they'd account for a pretty good wedge themselves. We can certainly get electricity: coal and natural gas in the next few year, nuclear for the next 50 while wind and solar are built out, then wind and solar until the sun's brightening makes life impossible on Earth. That's well beyond my personal horizon.
Gail, T-S.
Thanks, I think :-). I was hoping for a late Christmas prezzie. Seriously though, I appreciate the confirmation.
The worrying thing is that all three factors trend to become asymptotic about the X axis (time) and converge on much different scenario than we have today.
Even on it's own, that seems like an optimistic statement. When I consider all the other issues, a "continuing problem", looks more like a brick wall.
To be forewarned is to be forearmed I guess.